Reference Material

Disclaimer, Copyright

The U.S.S. Mariner is in no way affiliated with, condoned or given any notice by the Seattle Mariners baseball team, who have their own website. Similarly, we have no association with the ownership group or any businesses related to the Mariners. All article text is written by the authors, all pictures are taken by the authors, who retain copyright to their works. No copying or reproduction of any content here, photographic or otherwise, is authorized. Please email us if you wish to reproduce our work.

I Don’t Get It

Marc’s got the details on the Branyan trade below, so read that. Nuts and bolts, M’s gave up two fringe prospects who probably max out as bench players long term, so don’t freak out about them giving up the farm, but I still don’t get it.

The Mariners are 14 games out of first place. The time to try to add some offense to this roster was six weeks ago. Branyan is better than Carp and Kotchman, but not enough to matter. Hell, at this point, Albert Pujols might not be enough to matter. The Mariners are not catching the Rangers – not with this roster, and certainly not with this roster minus Cliff Lee, which is where we should be in a week or two.

Branyan makes the team marginally better, and the M’s didn’t give up much in prospects, but they’re now going to pay an opportunity cost. As we talked about a few weeks ago, the big benefit to being out of the race in June is that you can take flyers on young kids who need a shot to show what they can do. The M’s just eliminated a chance to do that at first base, a position that is an organizational hole for 2011. Rather than giving a shot to a guy like Kila Ka’aihue (.313/.481/.577 in Triple-A, age 26, completely buried in KC), the M’s are now going to use a few hundred at-bats on a guy who turns 35 this winter and has a serious back problem.

Yeah, the team needed power, but they needed power when it mattered. It doesn’t matter anymore. Now, they need to be looking to 2011. And, as much as I like watching The Muscle hit home runs, if he’s the 2011 starting first baseman, this team probably isn’t a contender. This isn’t a move for the future – it’s a move to make the present team less painful to watch hit. This is a move they should have made on May 1st, not June 26th.

Tags:

Comments

The attendance difference between a 70 win 2010 Mariner team without Branyan and a 75 win team with him is negligible.

First off, the difference between trying to sell tickets to casual fans for a losing team with a limp no-power 2-3 run a game offense and selling tickets for a losing team that can score a few runs and give them a better chance to win individual games is a bit more significant.

Even if the team and many fans (such as many reading here, myself included) have given up on the season, many local/regional fans still might have an interest in attending Mariner games, so long as the team can make a significant effort to win, i.e. not make the cost and time invested to see a game a complete waste of their time. A team that scores 3 runs a game and is clearly/obviously punting the season isn’t going to draw most casual fans.

But the biggest reason why Jack would want to buff up 2010’s team in a lost season is that, while ticket sales may not matter to the team’s bottom line, it does matter to the team’s relationship with FSNW, given FSNW is paying the Mariners a lucrative sum for a media contract. More interest in the team in 2010 means more viewers in 2010 which means higher average ratings over the life of the current contract which means more ad dollars down the line. If ratings tank, a) FSNW loses money in the long run as advertisers can cite lowered average ratings as justifiable leverage to lower the price on ad spots with the network and b) the Mariners may lose out on money from a new contract down the line whether with FSNW or another media carrier, as the network side will cite low ratings from this period as justification for low-balling the M’s when it comes time to negotiate a renewal.

We can argue about whether or not such a thing matters in the short run for the team’s fortunes in a vacuum, but there certainly appears to be a discernible motive or two to the move that goes beyond trying to compete in a lost season.

eponymous coward on
June 27th, 2010 11:18 am

Let me start by saying, I don’t really understand or believe in WAR.

So you’re going to talk authoritatively about something you don’t understand?

Branyan in this lineup from day one of this season would at least net us 4-5 wins already.

This is also a talent evaluation move. In this situation, opportunity cost only works for out-of-house candidates, as Dave suggests, who may or may not be available–we can’t know. In house, they’ve clearly made a judgment call on two twenty-somethings: Mike Carp is no more the answer in their view than Jeff Clement was (though he has had limited MLB opportunities this year to prove it) and clearly Casey Kotchman is not the answer going forward.

We’ll see whether it is a bad idea to give up on both Carp and Kotchman, but obviously Z doesn’t think they are the answer to anything and more at-bats will only prove the point.

Again, I think this points to a Twins deal.

Hammy57 on
June 27th, 2010 11:23 am

You heard me.

eponymous coward on
June 27th, 2010 11:28 am

First off, the difference between trying to sell tickets to casual fans for a losing team with a limp no-power 2-3 run a game offense and selling tickets for a losing team that can score a few runs and give them a better chance to win individual games is a bit more significant.

Then prove it. I showed my work- attendance did NOTHING after signing Cliff Lee. Attendance didn’t improve after the Sexson/Beltre signings during the 2004-2005 offseason, for that matter (lost 200,000 fans- very similar to what is likely to happen this year, in fact).

All the data I’ve seen with respect to attendance leads me to this repeating theme: fans come out when you contend, and don’t when you don’t. 2010 is a completely lost cause in terms of contention. Making roster moves based on the idea that fan-favorite players can draw fans to non-contending teams isn’t borne out by anything I’ve seen. Aside from the Barry Bonds/HOFer level kind of draw, you just don’t get bumps once the season is a dead letter- and moreover, it is much more likely this team LOSES attendance next year thanks to having gone in the toilet by June 1 than gains any bump from 3+ months of Branyan.

Hammy57 on
June 27th, 2010 11:29 am

Barry Bonds? HA!

BleedsPurple_74 on
June 27th, 2010 11:33 am

You know, I completely forgot about the context of the Branyan negotiations prior to the season. I stand corrected. He did indeed walk away and take a worse deal from the Indians eventually.

eponymous coward on
June 27th, 2010 11:42 am

The problem I see is adding Branyan and taking away Lee (which is almost certainly going to happen in the upcoming weeks) doesn’t improve the 2010 team, and even IF you had Branyan and Lee, you’re looking at a flawed team with serious holes on the roster: catcher and shortstop are a mess, DH isn’t all that great, Lopez is very clearly a poor fit for this stadium though an OK player overall, the bullpen talent and and back end of the rotation have various question marks. It’s an 80-85 win roster, which makes them a marginal contender in ANY division at best, and one of the big pieces (Lee) no longer fits in the current Mariner budget come October.

In this light, why is investing in the morale of the 2010 team a priority over trying to make the 2011 team a contender? That’s Dave’s point, and I guess your counterargument is this is one of those feel-good, rah-rah, let’s show the players love decisions. I would just say that like Griffey/Sweeney, these are decisions that aren’t really supported by a lot of objective evidence. Quite frankly, these kinds of decisions were getting old when Bill Bavasi was making them. Zduriencik’s versions of them aren’t the same sort of disasters, but I expect better.

eponymous coward on
June 27th, 2010 11:43 am

Barry Bonds? HA!

Bonds was most certainly a draw while chasing the HR record. But last I checked, Branyan’s a few hundred home runs shy of that record.

Just moments after I posted my comment I suddenly realized the Mariners signed a 10 year extension through 2020 with FSNW. Whoops!

The point remains, however. Team interest will impact FSNW’s bottom line via ad dollars as the M’s are one of their top selling points. And the team’s contract with KIRO, which tentatively expires in 2011, is also a factor. How the team plays this year could impact the team down the road in a variety of ways beyond the on-field product.

Yeah, losing all those games did a lot more to impact attendance than trading for Cliff Lee did.

Hammy57 on
June 27th, 2010 11:49 am

Eponymous, do you HAVE to argue against everyone? Can’t you just sit down and enjoy the game? Relax man. Relax.

Leroy Stanton on
June 27th, 2010 11:52 am

This was a depth move pure and simple – Branyan is now third on the bobblehead depth chart.

Hammy57 on
June 27th, 2010 11:53 am

This was a depth move pure and simple – Branyan is now third on the bobblehead depth chart.

I think The Muscle would be the only person whose bobblehead’s body would be bigger than the head.

Adam S on
June 27th, 2010 11:57 am

Regardless of what Z may say publicly, anyone who passed high school Algebra know the Mariners are a longshot to finish .500 this year, much less talk about playoffs. The realistic upside of this team is they play 500 ball the rest of the season.

My sense is there are three things going on here.

1) The Mariners have to play the remaining 90 games and the rules require them to have a first baseman. Kotchman has been a disaster, Carp is outmatched, Wilson is a joke, Sweeney is a DH and a poor one at that, so they’re void at 1B. They don’t even have a replacement-level first baseman. This gives them someone to fill the spot rather than running out .200/.280/.330 out there every day. While you may declare trying to win games as “noble”, the reality is drawing 10-12K people for all of August and September is likely to impact the payroll for 2011 and 2012. This at least makes the team more watchable even if it actually adds just 1-2 wins. Given Lee is going to be gone soon, they need something.

2) The cost is minimal. They might flip him and get two similar players back (I realize that goes against #1). Or they get a draft pick back after the season if they let him go.

3) Dave mentioned they have to fill 1B for 2011. And as noted above they have no internal options. Sure you don’t build around a 35 year old guy, but 2-3 wins for $5 is a good deal. This is much like the Jack Wilson deal last year — it’s a short-term fix to fill a need for next year.

As noted, the M’s wanted Branyan back and he wanted to come back. But they M’s weren’t willing to give him two years, nor was anyone else, and so they simply moved on to plan B.

eponymous coward on
June 27th, 2010 12:01 pm

Yeah, losing all those games did a lot more to impact attendance than trading for Cliff Lee did.

The Mariners were tied for the division lead after that last game where they drew ~15,000. Oh, and that was after an 85 win season, so the “but they sucked last year” argument doesn’t apply.

However, they were never in real contention in 2009 after early July- which, again, speaks to my argument that having a decent team that doesn’t really contend doesn’t help attendance.

The Mariners were tied for the division lead after that last game where they drew ~15,000.

During the early portion of 2010 where we could have still argued the M’s were in the hunt… they were at best a couple games over .500 and scoring about 3 runs a game, hardly a team that looked like they were going to seriously challenge for the AL West even if technically they were right there in the race.

JH on
June 27th, 2010 12:24 pm

The only real justification I see here is the potential Type B compensation the team might be able to get for Branyan if he walks this year. That’s far from a given, though. As he found out this past year, the market for old 1Bs with bad backs is really, really thin. I think if the Ms decline the option and offer him arbitration there’s a good chance he takes it next year.

That said, I like the idea of having a chance at another 1S pick in what’s shaping up to be one of the best draft pools in years.

scott19 on
June 27th, 2010 12:33 pm

the Mariners are a longshot to finish .500 this year

I would agree that the post-season is out of the question…but, based on what the White Sox have been up to lately, I wouldn’t entirely rule out .500 for this team if they got hot lukewarm for a stretch.

And I’ve been about as doom-and-gloom down on these guys as anybody this year.

“This trade can only help your organization, assuming the 2 prospects are as fringy as you guys are making them out to be.”

I don’t think this move has much to do with winning, the season’s over and they’re just making overtures to the casual fans to keep them coming in.

I submit that the idiot brain trust of Lincoln and Armstrong still think they can manufacture chemistry by bringing in more veteran players. They still haven’t learned after at least half a dozen failed attempts that winning breeds chemistry, not the other way around.

And I also submit that only a fanbase as accepting of mediocrity as this one (not the good people that frequent this website, but the people that still actually pay money to watch this dreadful team) should consider a third place division finish as acceptable.

scott19 on
June 27th, 2010 1:20 pm

I submit that the idiot brain trust of Lincoln and Armstrong still think they can manufacture chemistry by bringing in more veteran players. They still haven’t learned after at least half a dozen failed attempts that winning breeds chemistry, not the other way around.

I agree — and that is why, in my opinion as well, that regardless of who the GM is, this team will likely not go anywhere near a championship until those two finally retire.

nathaniel dawson on
June 27th, 2010 1:23 pm

“First off, the difference between trying to sell tickets to casual fans for a losing team with a limp no-power 2-3 run a game offense and selling tickets for a losing team that can score a few runs and give them a better chance to win individual games is a bit more significant.”

Then prove it. I showed my work- attendance did NOTHING after signing Cliff Lee. Attendance didn’t improve after the Sexson/Beltre signings during the 2004-2005 offseason, for that matter (lost 200,000 fans- very similar to what is likely to happen this year, in fact).

All the data I’ve seen with respect to attendance leads me to this repeating theme: fans come out when you contend, and don’t when you don’t. 2010 is a completely lost cause in terms of contention. Making roster moves based on the idea that fan-favorite players can draw fans to non-contending teams isn’t borne out by anything I’ve seen. Aside from the Barry Bonds/HOFer level kind of draw, you just don’t get bumps once the season is a dead letter- and moreover, it is much more likely this team LOSES attendance next year thanks to having gone in the toilet by June 1 than gains any bump from 3+ months of Branyan.

I’m not the poster you responded to, but I can provide some evidence you’re looking for.

“While WPCT obviously helped attendance overall, I was also curious to see if the slope of the lines changed depending on whether the team was over or under .500? Did an extra win provide different attendance value to a .450 team vs. a .550 team? I refit the model to test this out and found there was no significant difference. The relationship between WPCT and attendance was the same whether the team was good or bad. While of course an extra few wins won’t help a poor team get any closer to a championship, it will help at the box office, and the attendance effect of those wins is just as important to poor teams as to good teams. Next time you deride a bad team for “wasting” their money by signing a free agent when they have no chance of winning anything, realize that the difference between stinky and mediocre can have a strong effect at the box office, even if it won’t win any flags.”

There’s a lot of factors that can influence how much gain a team gets by winning more games, but it’s clear that even for bad teams, increased wins mean increased attendance. Putting the best team on the field is important to the M’s. Trying to win as many games as they can the rest of the season is important to the M’s. It’s not only important for their future income, it also impacts their ability to field a winning team in the future.

This is a franchise that has struggled the last few years, and they want to do what they can to maintain fan interest. It matters if they try to gain wins and fans the rest of the way.

JH on
June 27th, 2010 1:23 pm

That’s based on a whole lot of suppositions for which you have no evidence whatsoever.

snapper on
June 27th, 2010 1:35 pm

Anyone think that the M’s might plan to keep Branyan for 2011, having realized they made a mistake by not resigning him?

With all the hole’s they have for next year, filling 1B or DH for ~$3M might be a good play.

akampfer on
June 27th, 2010 1:51 pm

Snapper, I agree. Right away I thought they will put him at DH, because really, who do they have? First base makes no sense with Carp, Kotchman and now they are playing Josh Wilson to keep his warmer bat in the lineup, so they needed another first baseman like a hole in the head. I too think something bigger is coming and not necessarily involving Branyan. Maybe he’s here to fill a hole that’s about to be created.

JH on
June 27th, 2010 2:11 pm

You just named three players who have played first base for the mariners this year. You did not, however, name a single major league quality first baseman.

spankystout on
June 27th, 2010 2:38 pm

Jack Z should have signed Branyan over Sweeney in the offseason. He gave up on Branyan when he acquired the unproven Kotchman. Even when the market gave Branyan no leverage, Jack Z didn’t take advantage to bolster the ‘natural competition’ on the team. Now he gives up two guys whom may never contribute-but its two guys that should have never left. I agree with Dave, ‘I don’t get it.’ This move has me thinking Chuck and Howie are stirring the pot.

Ralph_Malph on
June 27th, 2010 2:52 pm

The only real justification I see here is the potential Type B compensation the team might be able to get for Branyan if he walks this year.

My understanding is there’s a mutual option for next year. If the M’s decline the option they have to pay him a buyout (funded by Cleveland, as I understand it). Can they really buy out his contract and then offer him arbitration? I wouldn’t think so. So I wouldn’t think there’s any way they could get compensation this year. Maybe next year, if they exercise the option for $5 million and then let him walk after next year.

The real reason for this trade was today’s lineup. Josh Wilson playing 1B and batting 5th. You can’t expect people to pay major league ticket prices if you don’t put a major league team on the field.

Grizz on
June 27th, 2010 3:42 pm

Can they really buy out his contract and then offer him arbitration?

Yes. There is nothing in the CBA or the Major League Rules preventing a team from offering arbitration to a player after turning down an option. As a practical matter, though, it rarely would happen because the option amount would have to be significantly more than what the player could reasonably expect to get in arbitration.

One exception would be if the player signed a contract that precluded the team from offering arbitration (which I think Aaron Sele and more recently Orlando Hudson have done).

2010 is over, so I am not upset about this deal. Jack Zduriencik might be a whole lot smarter than this one move looks on the surface.

By playing hardball with Branyan last fall, the team was positioned to have some leverage in upcoming negotiations. Perhaps it is a coincidence, but last winter Guti and Felix both signed reasonable contracts that were beneficial to both player and franchise.

In the meantime, Russell has been catching all sorts of hell from Cleveland fans and the media. In a move that cost essentially nothing, Branyan was given an opportunity to finish this season with a team where the crowd and the press already like him.

Jack has played some damn good poker since he sat down. Some hands turned out lousy, but I see no reason to question his skills.

mln on
June 27th, 2010 5:08 pm

Don’t worry Mariner fans. This is only the first step in Z’s master plan to reacquire Shin-Soo Choo and Asdrubal Cabrera from the Indians.

I wish.

scott19 on
June 27th, 2010 6:01 pm

Speaking of which, Mr. Choo hit two home runs today against the Reds…

Oh, how the stupidity of the Bavasi era continues to pay dividends!

JH on
June 27th, 2010 6:08 pm

Can they really buy out his contract and then offer him arbitration?

Yes.

kenshabby on
June 27th, 2010 8:44 pm

It’s times like this I’m glad I have two other teams to root for (contending teams, no less). A trend likely to continue for a few years based on the M’s state of affairs. :p

ivan on
June 27th, 2010 9:18 pm

Eponymous Coward said:

In this light, why is investing in the morale of the 2010 team a priority over trying to make the 2011 team a contender? That’s Dave’s point, and I guess your counterargument is this is one of those feel-good, rah-rah, let’s show the players love decisions.

I hope that wasn’t my comment you were referring to, because I didn’t say anything about “team morale” or “show the players love.” I asked you what “talent” the Branyan acquisition blocked. How does acquiring Branyan now hinder the team from improving in 2011? You could say that about anybody they acquired.

Further down, EC says:

Dave’s point is bringing Branyan back isn’t a particularly good way to improve prospects in 2011 compared to evaluating younger, less expensive players.

As I said, I don’t necessarily disagree, and I’m not trying to be argumentative here. I just want to know which “younger, less expensive players” you’re referring to. Some theoretical player they might get in a trade? That was the reasoning behind acquiring Kotchman, if I remember.

I recognize that Branyan is a risk. I get that. I get that his ceiling is limited. I get that we might have seen his peak already. I guess I consider this a low-risk, low-reward move. If they can’t raise the ceiling, then they raise the floor.

I don’t give a shit about attendance. I agree with you that if they win, attendance will take care of itself. I don’t give a shit about “morale” or “chemistry.” Winning takes care of that, too. But I can’t buy into the notion that acquiring Branyan now hurts them in 2011. We just don’t know enough to say that at this point .

philosofool on
June 27th, 2010 10:02 pm

Kila is on the Royals 40 man. That’s pretty good evidence that the Royals know he’s worth something more than a few fringe prospects. While it’s hard to see what the Royals are doing here, I think “completely buried” is an overstatement: Guilen is a free agent at the end of the year. Dayton Moore isn’t a good GM but he’s not unaware of Kila’s 2008 AA stats nor his current AAA stats; even the most old school GM loves a kid with a .300+ BA and the ability to hit 37 HR in a minor league season.

Adam S on
June 28th, 2010 1:03 am

based on what the White Sox have been up to lately, I wouldn’t entirely rule out .500 for this team if they got hot lukewarm for a stretch.

The Mariners would have to go 50-37 (.574) to finish 81-81. They’re a ~.400 team that’s about to trade away its best player. If you believe that the Mariners are much, much better than they’ve played so far and their true talent level is .500, they’d have a ~10% chance to win 50 or more of their remaining games. That’s a long shot even being optimistic of their ability.

Sadly this team’s achievement is going to be not losing 100 games.

SeasonTix on
June 28th, 2010 1:43 am

As a season ticket holder (weekend plan) I’ve pobably personally attended far more games at Safeco Field that most of the posters on this blog.

I consider myself a “casual fan.” I like to read this blog to get the stats perspective and I agree with a lot of what you guys have to say, but you fail to realize that the vast majority of people coming to watch the M’s play at Safeco don’t give a crap about most of the stuff discussed on this blog.

Case in point:

Last Wednesday I took my buddy to watch the M’s play the Cubs. I was excited because Cliff Lee was pitching.

Now get this …

(are you sitting down?)

He didn’t even know who Cliff Lee is!!

I had to explain to him that he’s currently one of the best … if not THE best pitchers in baseball and he just threw a complete game shutout in his previous start.

Now my friend is no dummie … he’s an electrical engineer and he’s been to many M’s games with me in the past.

He likes watching baseball games, but he is a casual fan (like me) … he enjoys coming to Safeco, having a couple of beers, watching baseball and hoping the M’s win.

He doesn’t check the standings and box scores every night … he doesn’t calculate WAR or VORP.
He doesn’t care if the M’s suck. As he told me once, “it’s still major league baseball.”

He is the typical Mariners baseball fan. And I’m surrounded by people just like him every time I go to a game.

So if you wonder why the team made this trade, I think it’s because they know they typical fan would rather see “The Muscle” knock one out of the park a couple times a week rather than watch the team score 0-2 runs per game. It’s as simple as that.

JH on
June 28th, 2010 2:12 am

even the most old school GM loves a kid with a .300+ BA and the ability to hit 37 HR in a minor league season.

In 2004, Calvin Pickering was a 27-year-old who put up a .314/.451/.712 line in AAA for the Royals, with 35 home runs in only 89 games. He backed up that performance with a .246/.338/.500 line in 142 major league plate appearances. Most of the analytical community expected the Royals to give Pickering a shot at regular playing time in 2005. He got 31 plate appearances in the big leagues, and his team got a .747 OPS from 1B, and a .790 OPS from the DH position.

Allard Baird, not Dayton Moore made that call, but there are numerous examples of late-20s 1B/DH’s who never got a shot. Carlos Pena rotted away in AAA his age 27 and 28 seasons, to name just one more example. 1B/DH are tough positions to break into the majors. It is entirely possible (and from the available evidence, likely) that the Royals don’t value Kila. Another player whose team clearly doesn’t value him is John Bowker. I’d love to see the Ms give him a shot.

themojoworkin on
June 28th, 2010 3:34 pm

Is it possible that he qualifies as a Type A or B free agent and nets us picks? Sounds like the players we gave up weren’t too significant- maybe a sandwich pick (if he ends up a type B) is more valuable?